The content of this blog presumes you are already familiar with Denver Snuffer's books. Careful explanations given in the books lay the foundation for what is contained here. If you read this blog without having first read his books, then you assume responsibility for your own misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the writer's intent. Please do not presume to judge Mr. Snuffer's intentions if you have not first read his books.

Pages

Friday, September 21, 2012

A number of clarifications from this week

It is impossible in a short post to ever discuss any subject completely. For the most part, all posts are a abbreviated ideas to cause anyone who reads this to think. I want the reader to turn ideas over in their own minds, and reach their own conclusion, after hopefully being provoked to thought by what I say. It is a mistake to think because I have said one thing that I have then said everything.

To illustrate and hopefully clarify, and certainly cause further thought, I want to add the following comments. These are taken from input I received this week from some of you.
_______________________________________________

I pray to the Father in the name of the Son. In my mind I think of the Father. I let heaven speak to my heart concerning that name-title and I do not presume to have the right to tell anyone what comes into my mind. I also thank the Father for the sacrifice of His Son.

I would add that "El" is singular. "Elohim" is plural. In Abraham 3, there is a group identified as "the noble and great." The noble and great are the "we" who are to prove "them." This is in Abraham 3.

When the matter is settled, in chapter 4 of Abraham, that "we" or "the noble and great" commence the creation, and that group throughout Abraham 4 are continually referred to as "the Gods." The English term "the Gods" captures the same idea as the Hebrew word "Elohim."

If you have not read The First Three Words of the Endowment, you may want to do so. **
_________________________________________________

It would be an astonishing, but not completely unprecedented, if one of the "sons of God" were to fall away. Were that to happen, the heavens would weep over him.
__________________________________________________

When Christ says that no man "comes unto the Father but by [Him]", this implicitly means that Christ will at some point take you to His Father.

When Christ promised not to leave us "comfortless", he added that "my Father will love him, and we come unto him, and make our abode with him." (John 14:23). Joseph Smith added "the appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man's heart is an old secterian notion, and is false." (D&C 130: 3).

Joseph affirms he "saw two Personages."

It is more important that you come unto Christ and you allow Him to teach you these things. Pray to the Father in His name, ask Him, listen to Him. It is Christ alone who is responsible for the salvation of each of us. Read the scriptures carefully. In fact, if you will pray and study your scriptures diligently, He will open up to your mind the meaning of the more mysterious passages and use the words of the Prophets found in our scriptures to answer your questions. Do much more of that. There is no man who is a substitute for Jesus Christ. **
__________________________________________________

I agree that the purpose of keys, and in particular priesthood keys, is to confer an authoritative invitation to the recipient from God.
__________________________________________________

I would not encourage anyone to leave the church. It was commissioned by and still authorized by God. The majority has always had a divine preference and protecting hand. Splinter groups have always dwindled or fallen into abuse and corruption. The August 1844 vote in Nauvoo was the right of the saints under the Lord's law of "common consent." I believe the Lord did accept the vote. Whatever shortcomings that generation had, they were only like all of humanity. Our Lord suffered for all imperfect people. But He also will discipline and correct us, even if He needs to use a rod to do so.
___________________________________________________

In my thinking, a "President" or a "candidate to be the President" is a figure head. Once a man is elected to be the President of the United States, he is referred to as "the "Administration." I believe there is a great difference between a man, on the one hand, and "the President of the United States", or "the Administration", on the other.

Let me see if I can illustrate the point.

I think President Jimmy Carter was a failure. I think he was an embarrassment as an administration throughout the world. President Jimmy Carter made so many errors that in my mind I have little hesitation in thinking of him as foolish. In short, my regard for President Jimmy Carter borders on exasperation and deep disappointment.

In contrast, the man Jimmy Carter is principled, devoted, and admirable. As a man he possesses basic goodness. I think he is good-hearted.

Bear that distinction in mind. My comments concerning Mitt Romney had nothing to do with the man, and everything to do with the "the candidate", and the representative of a proposed "new Administration." Like Jimmy Carter, if I change the topic from the Candidate, to the man Mitt Romney, it's a different topic.

If you watched the GOP convention, before Mitt Romney's acceptance speech, there were many who had the opportunity to describe Mitt Romney, the man. He is a compassionate and exemplary Mormon bishop. He rendered kind, compassionate and loving support to members of his ward while he was bishop and for years afterwards. While those people were speaking, the camera panned the audience. There were many in the audience who were moved to tears as they listened to those people speak. Mitt Romney, the man, seems to me to be an example of how all bishops should be. More than that, he seems to be an example of what all of us should be.

When I said that I wish Mitt Romney did not represent my faith, I had exclusive reference to "the candidate" and not the man.

I know you cannot read my mind. So that is probably my communication failure. As to Mitt Romney the man, I am grateful he is a member of my faith.

I could write pages more. I am only offering a glimpse.
______________________________________________

When I am in the voting booth, (and I always vote) I have never voted for evil. Therefore, I have never voted for the "lesser of two evils."

While I don't think it is anyone's business, over the years I have voted for, among other people, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, written in Lee Iacocca and former LDS church historian, Marlin Jensen. As I cast these votes, I always thought I voted for someone who would be wise and good.

That post did not represent a decision about anything. That post represented musings I thought might be helpful to others.

In addition, I hoped there would be some few who might read that post and detect some layers. For anyone who would be open to the idea, I think you could well consider those musings to be about you, me, or all of us. What ultimately turns into the "Administration" almost always reflects quite accurately a collective decision. In other words, we always give the power to the "Administration" that we deserve to have lead us.

We have made thousands of decisions, and cast millions of votes to place the Candidate Romney at the head of a political party. That is us.

**[There is nothing inconsistent in these two statements. If you can't understand it, it is because you will not ask and allow God to enlighten your mind. Remember, I am not trying to get you to understand what I understand. I am trying to get you to open your heart, your mind; look to heaven for guidance and get answers to anything you don't understand.]